However, lately for the past 5 years or so. Apple made it to #1 and have started to play it safe. Really avoiding big new product releases. And just giving boring incremental updates.
And yet, when Dell, HP, Lenovo, Asus, Acer, et al. do that for decades on end, nobody cries that they have "Lost Their Mojo".
Face it; for the past 3 to 5 years, we happen to be in a kind of boring time, compute-wise. The days of the incredible speed gains are long past. We have caught up to the laws of physics, and the only thing that will make computers faster now is more cores, and even that has a point of diminishing returns, heat-wise.
That's because the exciting stuff isn't happening at the consumer level it's happening at the engineering level. For example, longer battery life, lower power requirements at the same or slightly higher processing speeds, lighter weight, etc. It's there, but it's not all that interesting for most consumers, given that any computer bought in the last 8 years would work just fine for most people.
Virtual Reality is the latest hype. It comes around every 20 years or so. It is getting closer. Graphics power and 3D technology have improved to the point where VR is possible on the desktop. But it still has a long way to go.
He opted to go with the IPO and now a number of us own shares in the company.
Shareholders provide investment funds but do not manage the company or get to make decisions about it; if the management doesn't approve the sale it's not likely to be doable, and doesn't matter if the CXo has 1/5 or 1/10 the shares.
In some companies, shareholders have additional rights --- it just depends on organizational structure and bylaws.
You don't buy and retain shares in a company, if you fundamentally do not agree with what direction management will be expected to take the business.
If you want your investment property sold out to the highest bidder anytime the price is right, then buy shares in a company whose management will do that.
In the case of the sale of a publicly traded company, shareholders do get to make the decision, not Management. While Management in a publicly traded company can set the agenda, try to influence shareholder opinions, and may have "poison pill" clauses, they do not have the power to refuse or rescind a successful majority vote to sell the company. The shareholders, by-and-large are the owners and can do what they want with it as long as there are enough of them that want the same thing.
Print Handwriting on my Surface Pro 4 in One-Note using the stylus. And I take notes, not transcribe, for work meetings and projects. I used to take notes in a lined notepad using a pen but then we moved to a new office where we no longer have assigned seating. So. No storage. Which is one of the reasons why I bought the Surface Pro 4.
The thing is.. I'm not really clear on what IS a job skill that is in demand.. I could spend the next year learning everything about Java, but when my training is done if there are no Java jobs that are better than the job I had before then I have done myself a disservice. Plus people should be able to live to work not work to live. If I have to spend all my personal time learning things for the next job then there isn't much point being in technology at all.
My thought, on the IT infrastructure side, Cloud, WiFi, and IT project management...
No idea what's in demand on the programming side...
I only bought the Gen3 Kindle because it was the last e-reader on the planet that still had physical buttons
PocketBook still makes reader with buttons. PocketBook 626 Touch Lux 3. There are also others, such as Onyx Boox, Boyue (and its OEM versions), Cybook Muse, but you mentioned PB 360.
Yes, the lack any type of button is the reason why I kept my Kindle Keyboard for so long. I upgraded to the Kindle Voyage when it came out. The Voyage may not have physical buttons, but the capacitive buttons work perfectly fine. Personally, I don't see enough of a change between the Voyage and the Oasis to make we want to pay ~$400 for one.
Heat and power consumption? A customer has a plasma set near in a confined space I have to work and it's like standing by a space heater.
Power consumption isn't that much more than LCD. The main driver was production cost. Cost per inch of Plasma TV's were higher than LCD. Finally, as far as I know, they never solved the problem of being able to produce smaller plasma TVs (i.e. 40 inch or less) which is a large portion of the market.
I have one of the last 52" Plasma models produced by Samsung and it's still going strong (much as I would like to replace it with a bigger LCD TV). I primarily got it for movies, which look awesome on it. And, even though I also use it for gaming, I've never had any problems with burn-in. I'll probably end up replacing it with a 4K TV in about 2 years once 4K content (i.e. movies) and 4K standards are more fully baked.
There are a couple of reasons, beyond being a gamer, to upgrade a 5+ year old computer. - SSD drives - faster bootup times - USB 3.0 - Quicker backups to external drives, faster photo transfer from memory cards (devices must be USB 3.0 as well) - Better battery life for Laptops - Most last around 6 hours now, about triple what they used to.
However, most of these are not important enough to the average consumer to shell out $700 for a new computer.
The problem is that the ipad isn't a higher quality look feel, or experience anymore. It's "luxury" because apple tells you it is - not because it delivers anything resembling an improved experience.
I've have two iPad 2 devices (one for work and one for home), a high end Android tablet (Asus TF700T, high end when it was released), and a Nexus 7. - The iPad does what I want, play games mainly or test WiFi at work. - The Asus Android tablet still works but because there is no stable current Android releases (and yes, I've used third party firmware from the XDA forums) and because of limited memory/CPU it's been sitting in my drawer. - The 2013 Nexus 7 was bought to be my car diagnostics tool along with an ODB blutooth device. I use it every now an then to read codes or if I need a portable tablet to take to the garage or when going out to a friend's place.
My newest tablet is a Surface Pro 4. We moved into a new office with a flexible work space (i.e. no permanent desks or offices). I'm using the stylus a lot to take notes, draw network diagrams, etc., stuff that I used to do on paper. But now that I have no place to store paper, it's all electronic. I've also been using it as a WiFi analysis tool. Since it's basically a full Windows PC, I can run all of my network tools on it.
I really do wish that Microsoft had a better app ecosystem like Apple as there are a number of apps and games that I would love to be able to run on the Surface. But the ability to take notes using a stylus and run full network tools are more important to me at this time. Plus, I still have my old iPad for games....
A bunch of datacenters are already switching to RJ point 5, because it halves the amount of space taken up by top-of-rack switches and patch panels. There's no need to rewire anything, as they both terminate to the same Cat6 cable, and patch cables are available for RJ.5 to RJ-45.
If that is true, then they must have some sort of partnership deal with TE. I could see it being used in specialized environments where off-the-shelf blades or 1U servers are used in huge clusters (i.e. Google). But, no one that I know of in the corporate enterprise space has need for RJ.5 connectors.
We are using TwinAX, which has SFP connectors, to uplink servers. Fiber is used between switches. A combination of SFP switches and VM clusters has shrunk the datacenter footprint more dramatically than anything else. Cloud services are also reaching a maturing point.
The article was written by a noob. The i7 5775c is a 3.3GHz CPU, not 3.7GHz. 3.7GHz is only the *turbo boost* clockspeed.
If they can't even get simple facts correct, then it doesn't lend much credibility to the rest of the article.
My desktop has 6 fans in it, including the CPU fan and it is whisper quiet until I start playing Fallout, then my 970 kicks in and it sounds like a plane about to take off...
I used anti-vibration rubber screws and specifically choose fans that are designed to be quiet and went SSD for the OS drive. No need to go fanless these days...
PUC doesn't have authority to tell a municipality who can or cannot connect to a pole. Everyone isentitled to use the poles. Poles are, contrary to AT&T's old conception, not owned by AT they are owned by the town, and a town can and does wield eminent domain to possess property for a public good.
I can't speak for this case in particular but in many cases the poles ARE owned by AT&T or some other private entity. They might be owned by a third party like the power company. In fact it's kind of uncommon for the poles to actually be owned by the local municipality. There are laws governing use and access to the poles but they may very well be privately owned. For example the poles outside my house are owned by the local power company. The phone and cable companies pay the power company to utilize them. If the pole gets damaged it is the power company's responsibility to fix the pole. The local government does not and never has owned the poles near me.
My reading of the article on the law suit is that it isn't about who owns the poles. The problem is that the new ordinance has language that allows Google to require AT&T to re-position AT&T equipment on the pole at AT&T's expense. I'm willing to bet that the agreements that Google made with AT&T in other areas required Google to pay at least some of the expense. Which, personally, I think is fair.
If you can avoid it, you do not owe it. It is legal. It is not fraud, however unjust you may think it is.
If you owe it, try to hide it, and do not pay it, it's called "Tax Evasion". That's against the law, you don't pay back taxes you pay back taxes and go to jail.
If there is a dispute between what you think you owe, and what the government thinks you owe, it's called a lawsuit. If France wins, google owes back taxes (presumably with interest). If Google wins they still pay nothing.
France is asserting that Google does in fact owe money that Google does not believe it owes. It's a lawsuit. This distinction is incredibly important in many countries, as what these companies are doing is usually LEGAL. It is our own governments that are screwing up in tax law, and our governments that need to fix the problem. Of course the second you talk about "fixing" tax law, you end up with all sorts of barnyard noises in congress (in the US, but I imagine we don't have the market cornered on this). It's easier in this case to wage a war of public opinion (similar to FBI and keys to the city) than to actually try to get these sorts of laws changed against a hostile congress. But, as a people, we need to understand this: the government is complicit. The only reason these lawsuits even happen is that there is debate, there shouldn't be debate.
Also when you go do lawsuit stuff, you always exaggerate your claims. It's part of the game.
I think the problem here is NOT that it is illegal or legal. They are using tricks to evade the laws or go in areas where the laws haven't explicitly forbidden. Companies are actively seeking loopholes in the wording or in international tax treaties, they are then abusing these holes. It may be legal by the letter of the law (or at least not illegal), but it was certainly not the intention of the law to allow it. It is like someone finding a way to steal or kill someone with some new technology and then finding the law doesn't cover it, it is obvious it is wrong and should be illegal but it hasn't been made explicitly illegal so they get away with it.
No, the problem is EXACTLY whether it is legal or illegal.
The definition of something being illegal is that there is a law that prohibits that behavior. If there isn't a law against it then it is legal. Argue all you want whether loopholes are just or unjust and whether the use of a loophole for non-intended use is moral or immoral but the point is that poorly crafted tax laws results in the legal reduction in tax burden for companies and rich people who can hire smart tax accountants.
As for your comparison, it's completely stupid. We have laws against murder and theft, full stop. Doesn't matter how you do it or if you use a proxy. The laws even cover being a party or conspiracy to murder. The only loophole, if you want to call it that, for murder is self-defense.
There is no law that says that you have to pay a specific amount of taxes. For example, if there was a law that all companies must pay a minimum of 10% in taxes with no qualifications and Google used loopholes as justification to pay less then your argument would make sense. There is no such law as far as I know.
I agree with you that in a just world corporations would shoulder more of the tax and infrastructure burden than they do. But it's up to us to vote in and lobby people who can change the laws.
"A Logitech spokesman told the MIT Technology review that the company has a software update to fix the issue, but that the vulnerability Bastille detected “would be complex to replicate” since it requires being physically close to the victim, which makes it “a difficult and unlikely path of attack.”
It seems to me that you would have to be fairly close to the system that you are attacking as the USB plug doesn't have a lot of power or range. Yes, an attacker could install a repeater. But that too requires physical access. Plus, you have to know what type of system you are attacking (UNIX vs Windows), etc. It does seem like Logitech makes a good point even though they may have a vested interest in downplaying it.
> If nuclear was far superior, we'd be installing more of it.
Right. The world is completely rational and efficient.
I agree that Nuclear is superior for the simple reason that it is efficient and provides consistent power. Yes, bad things can happen. But modern designs are much safer.
As for popularity, well... Justin Beiber, Paris Hilton, Kardashians... I think that I made my point.. Just because something is popular doesn't mean that it's a good decision or superior.
I just want to point out that it's not an either/or situation. Personally, I love solar and wish we had much more of it in the US. Panels are finally getting to the point where they are efficient enough to make economic sense in the North East US and Canada. I'm less bullish on wind power. My concern has to do with the number of bird kills. Birds eat insects, including mosquitoes, and I hate mosquitoes. The most promising, in my opinion, is tidal power. But, then, we might end up disturbing fishing grounds. Everything has a trade-off...
wind, like solar and tidal, just needs good efficient energy storage
Fixed that for you... Battery storage will never reach the point where it is better for the environment than alternative solutions. High power capacitors are closer to being realistic. Alternatively, one of the traditional ways of storing solar and wind power is to pump water from a lower point to a higher point and then release it to generate power when needed.
That being said, it's going to be several generations before we have the technology to store enough power where we can begin to shut down power plants.
We can choose living it up in a nuclear powered world, or suffer. If you think we have any other choice I say... bite me.
I agree with you. The biggest problem with nuclear power is that we aren't building new plants fast enough. The vast majority of nuclear power plants are old, really old, and past their original lifetimes.
The one technology that I think can compete with nuclear going forward is tidal energy.
A bigger question is - why didn't they count frames?
We know there are two HD resolutions for OTA - 1080i60 (60 fields per second, or approximately 30 frames/sec), and 720p60 (60 frames per second). These two resolutions and framerates have the nice property that they have the same pixel clock and data rate, so you can choose between resolution and framerate - for traditional TV programming you often just want resolution, so you use 1080i, but for fast action, you want framerate, so you use 720p.
Now, it's easy to see what framerate the camera runs at - take a spot in the game, and count frames while an onscreen timer (like say, the game clock!) ticks away. Then you move to the part of the video in question, then count frames. Since it's less than a second, it would be less than 60 frames in total, so it should be possible to manually hand count how many frames elapsed between the disputed times and then you can compute how much time has elapsed.
This way can also be used to verify that the camera timer is ticking away at the proper rate.
What I don't understand is how a digital timer would be affected by frame rates at all. It sounds to me like whoever came up with this particular timer solution was being a little too cute by coming up with some sort of algorithm rather than directly polling the clock.
Personally, I would have programmed it so that the recording system synched it's internal clock using GPS to atomic time servers and embedded the internal clock information directly into the video. If you do this, it doesn't matter how many fps are used.
Locking Torque converters have been the rule for a LONG time, like since the 70's... With all due respect for the guys from Car Talk, this *helps* with the efficiency, but there still is some energy losses due to the necessity of running the automatic part of the transmission. You have to keep the shift clutches engaged, that takes hydraulic pressure which implies a pump is running someplace. You also must circulate the transmission fluid to keep the various things lubricated and cool, which takes some power too. Power consumption in the transmission means less power for driving getting to the wheels.
I'm not saying the differential between the automatic and the manual is all that much these days, it's not, but if you are on the highway the manual is going to be better. Now if you want to argue that it's unlikely that your average skilled driver would be able to achieve better gas mileage in a mixed environment of city and highway driving on their manual, that for 99.9% of drivers would do better on an automatic, I can only agree with you. However, just straight out driving down the road at highway speed, not shifting, that manual is going to be hard to beat, all things being equal.
As you said, the difference is minor, approximately 1 MPG if we believe the numbers from the manufacturers. Personally, I consider that a very minor advantage, if not a draw when it comes to comparing the two. However, if you listen to most manual transmission fans, you would think that the difference was 10MPG. Those days are long gone...
One of the first things President Obama did after arriving in the White House was to steal Chrysler (the company that made Jeeps) from its shareholders, many of whom were middle class retirees, and essentially GIVE the company to Fiat. The price Fiat paid was essentially a token, and the President's team insisted the buyer be a foreign company. They company's "Jeep" brand had already been degraded during the Chrysler/Daimler years when a Euro-designed vehicle was re-branded as a "Jeep" (the The Jeep Liberty) and presented to the public as a newer better Cherokee (which it is NOT). The Liberty was bad enough, but the stuff rolling out now under the name "Jeep Cherokee" are just cars pretending to be SUVs and have little in common with what everybody used to think of as a "Jeep". As for a bad user-interface? It's a FIAT with the name "Jeep" stamped on it!
There wasn't anything special about those older Jeeps that you mention. Yeah, they looked more rugged, but that was about it. What has always differentiated Jeeps from other trucks is the 4WD system. All of the models that you mentioned have some form of the Jeep 4WD that are probably just as or more capable than the older systems. On top of that, Jeep continues to offer their higher end 4WD system on various trim levels (i.e. the Trailhawk). For example, I've seen many examples on youtube of people taking a 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited (my car) off-roading and it holding it's own.
My thought is that you've never tested the capabilities of the modern Jeep and that it's the looks that you don't like...
Correct for city driving. But this is a more recent development and it's not that much more. If you can keep the engine in the most economic sweet spot longer, you will get better gas mileage. It's hard to do that as effectively with a finite number of gears, even with flawless picking of the shift points by the driver..
However, if you are doing highway driving, the manual wins, every time.
Not true...
This used to be true because Automatics had torque converters with a slip system and Manuals didn't. Manuals lock into a gear and have no slip. Automatics have a slip mechanism that allows the car to stop at a light and not stall. This slip system also meant that there was some slip at higher speeds resulting in poorer fuel mileage in older Automatics.
However, modern Automatics have the ability to automatically "lock" the torque converter into a gear at higher speeds. This negates the advantage that manuals had at highway speeds. http://www.cartalk.com/blogs/t...
In fact, a lot of the old arguments for selecting a Manual have dropped by the wayside as Automatic transmission technology has improved. There are really only two remaining arguments for get a manual, the first is that cars with manual transmissions cost a bit less and the second is that, for many, they are fun to drive... That last one will never go away...
I hear ya... Who wants to steal a crappy car with a manual transmission anyway?
I buy the manual because it's cheaper and lasts longer and I'm only interested in getting to point a to point b for as long as possible as cheaply as possible. Nobody want's my car because it's a bare bones pile of loosely related scrap metal and used car parts for most of the time I drive it.
Actually... it isn't the transmission that deters thieves. It's the car. But keep telling yourself that.
Manual transmission BOXES last much longer than automatics. The clutches, however, vary with the driver. If the driver is good, then the manual is just as good as the automatic. If not, then the automatic's clutches will last longer. http://mechanics.stackexchange...
I see that you didn't haul out the old "manual is better on gas" myth. It used to be true, but the newer CVT and 8/9 speed engines are better.
Personally, I can drive a stick shift. My first car had a manual transmission. The most annoying part for me was holding it on hills. I had no problems doing it, it was just annoying. One of the cool things is that you can start it with a dead battery by just pushing it or rolling down hill (It was small enough that I could push it myself). It was great in College when I didn't have money for a new battery.
My Kia won't let me take the key out of the ignition unless the shifter is in park. You're saying my econobox has more safety features than a luxury Jeep?
I believe that all of the Jeeps now have keyless ignition... No key to remove...
Plus, the article clearly says that many of these cases are when people are leaving the car running. In these situations, they wouldn't be taking out the key, even in the Kia. For example, when getting out of the car to throw something in the back, to pick someone up, etc.
Should we hold back progress in to protect people from injury, should we penalize the RTFM challenged individuals, or something else?
There are two issues here. The first is new technology and the second is user training.
I have a 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee. The shifter acts just like a joystick, changing gears with a bump instead of going into a mechanical position. This forces the user to have to look at the dash, which shows the shift position, or at the top of the shift stick, shift position is lit. This would be a transition for people who have never used joysticks and who are used to muscle memory to determine what gear the shifter is in.
The second piece is user training. The manual clear says that the driver should apply the parking brake every time they park the car. This not only ensures the driver's safety in case they have the shifter in the wrong position but it also takes some of the stress off of the drive system. Of course, a lot of drivers are lazy and never use the parking brake. And Yes, on the Jeep it's called a "Parking Brake" for a reason. It isn't an "emergency brake", though it doubles as one.
In fact, this is what the manual says:
PARK (P) This range supplements the parking brake by locking the transmission. The engine can be started in this range. Never attempt to use PARK while the vehicle is in motion. Apply the parking brake when leaving the vehicle in this range. When parking on a level surface, you may shift the transmission into PARK first, and then apply the parking Shift Lever brake.
It's easy to argue that using a joystick is design flaw or a step backwards. I agree that humans are built with muscle memory and that a mechanical shift position is better than an electronic one. The ideal would be an electronic shifter with mechanical gates. But that doesn't negate the requirement to apply the parking bake in this type of vehicle.
It could be argued that using the parking brake as intended is muscle memory. In fact, I'm at the point where I automatically apply it when parking and disengage it when starting the car. The problem is that most drivers have no idea what the parking brake is for, beyond an emergency.
A rambling way to say that the design is partially to blame, an electronic shifter with gates would be better, and the driver is partially to blame, not using the parking brake. I would say a 50/50 or 60/40 split.
Oh, and one last thing, putting a car in Park does not guarantee that it will not roll. There have been cases where the parking prawl gives way (in general, not specific to any brand). It's always safer to use the parking brake.
The problem is, 200 Volts on a 110V circuit is a surge and will fry a 110V power supply. So surge protectors need to be voltage specific or they become ineffective at lower voltages.
I would go another route: Make sure that your have spare/alternative ways to power or charge your equipment. For example carry a 12V charger for your laptop (also works on some airplanes). Only buy equipment (phones/tablets) you can charge from an USB outlet. Carry a spare USB charger.
This will get easier over time with the USB type C connector and USB power delivery, as modern devices get equipped with it.
This...
Buy one or several power banks for your phone/tablet. Charge the power bank, not the device, and use the power bank to charge your portable devices.
I use a Kensington K33117 International All-in-One Travel Plug Adapter plus a Monster MP OTG400 BK Outlets To Go Power Strip when traveling. The Kensington travel adapter has a built-in ceramic slow transition fuse rated at 250v 2.5A plus a spare in the removable end. While it will take a grounded plug (i.e. the power strip, it's a tight fit but it does fit) it's not connected to anything, It's not a problem because none of my travel device plugs have grounded plugs, they are all two-prong.
I've never had the fuse blow nor experienced any problem with my devices during travel, so take the above with a grain of salt. Basically, I can't say how good the fuse is because I've never needed it.
This got me curious about how much power I am using for my devices as they have been upgraded since I got the travel plug adapter. Looking at my devices, the Surface Pro 4 tablet takes 1A input (~1.35A for a laptop), dual port 5V 2.1A USB adapter takes 0.5A input, and universal camera battery charger takes 0.2A input. So, a total of 1.7A when I travel for vacation and 2.05A when I travel for business @ 110v. If you are on 220V, the auto-switching power supply will use approximately half of the rated Amps. So, for me, a rating of 2.5A is fine.
Slashdot Mirror
However, lately for the past 5 years or so. Apple made it to #1 and have started to play it safe. Really avoiding big new product releases. And just giving boring incremental updates.
And yet, when Dell, HP, Lenovo, Asus, Acer, et al. do that for decades on end, nobody cries that they have "Lost Their Mojo".
Face it; for the past 3 to 5 years, we happen to be in a kind of boring time, compute-wise. The days of the incredible speed gains are long past. We have caught up to the laws of physics, and the only thing that will make computers faster now is more cores, and even that has a point of diminishing returns, heat-wise.
That's because the exciting stuff isn't happening at the consumer level it's happening at the engineering level. For example, longer battery life, lower power requirements at the same or slightly higher processing speeds, lighter weight, etc. It's there, but it's not all that interesting for most consumers, given that any computer bought in the last 8 years would work just fine for most people.
Virtual Reality is the latest hype. It comes around every 20 years or so. It is getting closer. Graphics power and 3D technology have improved to the point where VR is possible on the desktop. But it still has a long way to go.
He opted to go with the IPO and now a number of us own shares in the company.
Shareholders provide investment funds but do not manage the company or get to make decisions about it; if the management doesn't approve the
sale it's not likely to be doable, and doesn't matter if the CXo has 1/5 or 1/10 the shares.
In some companies, shareholders have additional rights --- it just depends on organizational structure and bylaws.
You don't buy and retain shares in a company, if you fundamentally do not agree with what direction management will be expected to take the business.
If you want your investment property sold out to the highest bidder anytime the price is right, then buy shares in a company whose management will do that.
In the case of the sale of a publicly traded company, shareholders do get to make the decision, not Management. While Management in a publicly traded company can set the agenda, try to influence shareholder opinions, and may have "poison pill" clauses, they do not have the power to refuse or rescind a successful majority vote to sell the company. The shareholders, by-and-large are the owners and can do what they want with it as long as there are enough of them that want the same thing.
Print Handwriting on my Surface Pro 4 in One-Note using the stylus. And I take notes, not transcribe, for work meetings and projects. I used to take notes in a lined notepad using a pen but then we moved to a new office where we no longer have assigned seating. So. No storage. Which is one of the reasons why I bought the Surface Pro 4.
The thing is.. I'm not really clear on what IS a job skill that is in demand.. I could spend the next year learning everything about Java, but when my training is done if there are no Java jobs that are better than the job I had before then I have done myself a disservice. Plus people should be able to live to work not work to live. If I have to spend all my personal time learning things for the next job then there isn't much point being in technology at all.
My thought, on the IT infrastructure side, Cloud, WiFi, and IT project management...
No idea what's in demand on the programming side...
I only bought the Gen3 Kindle because it was the last e-reader on the planet that still had physical buttons
PocketBook still makes reader with buttons.
PocketBook 626 Touch Lux 3.
There are also others, such as Onyx Boox, Boyue (and its OEM versions), Cybook Muse, but you mentioned PB 360.
Yes, the lack any type of button is the reason why I kept my Kindle Keyboard for so long. I upgraded to the Kindle Voyage when it came out. The Voyage may not have physical buttons, but the capacitive buttons work perfectly fine. Personally, I don't see enough of a change between the Voyage and the Oasis to make we want to pay ~$400 for one.
Heat and power consumption? A customer has a plasma set near in a confined space I have to work and it's like standing by a space heater.
Power consumption isn't that much more than LCD. The main driver was production cost. Cost per inch of Plasma TV's were higher than LCD. Finally, as far as I know, they never solved the problem of being able to produce smaller plasma TVs (i.e. 40 inch or less) which is a large portion of the market.
I have one of the last 52" Plasma models produced by Samsung and it's still going strong (much as I would like to replace it with a bigger LCD TV). I primarily got it for movies, which look awesome on it. And, even though I also use it for gaming, I've never had any problems with burn-in. I'll probably end up replacing it with a 4K TV in about 2 years once 4K content (i.e. movies) and 4K standards are more fully baked.
There are a couple of reasons, beyond being a gamer, to upgrade a 5+ year old computer.
- SSD drives - faster bootup times
- USB 3.0 - Quicker backups to external drives, faster photo transfer from memory cards (devices must be USB 3.0 as well)
- Better battery life for Laptops - Most last around 6 hours now, about triple what they used to.
However, most of these are not important enough to the average consumer to shell out $700 for a new computer.
The problem is that the ipad isn't a higher quality look feel, or experience anymore. It's "luxury" because apple tells you it is - not because it delivers anything resembling an improved experience.
I've have two iPad 2 devices (one for work and one for home), a high end Android tablet (Asus TF700T, high end when it was released), and a Nexus 7.
- The iPad does what I want, play games mainly or test WiFi at work.
- The Asus Android tablet still works but because there is no stable current Android releases (and yes, I've used third party firmware from the XDA forums) and because of limited memory/CPU it's been sitting in my drawer.
- The 2013 Nexus 7 was bought to be my car diagnostics tool along with an ODB blutooth device. I use it every now an then to read codes or if I need a portable tablet to take to the garage or when going out to a friend's place.
My newest tablet is a Surface Pro 4. We moved into a new office with a flexible work space (i.e. no permanent desks or offices). I'm using the stylus a lot to take notes, draw network diagrams, etc., stuff that I used to do on paper. But now that I have no place to store paper, it's all electronic. I've also been using it as a WiFi analysis tool. Since it's basically a full Windows PC, I can run all of my network tools on it.
I really do wish that Microsoft had a better app ecosystem like Apple as there are a number of apps and games that I would love to be able to run on the Surface. But the ability to take notes using a stylus and run full network tools are more important to me at this time. Plus, I still have my old iPad for games....
A bunch of datacenters are already switching to RJ point 5, because it halves the amount of space taken up by top-of-rack switches and patch panels. There's no need to rewire anything, as they both terminate to the same Cat6 cable, and patch cables are available for RJ.5 to RJ-45.
If that is true, then they must have some sort of partnership deal with TE. I could see it being used in specialized environments where off-the-shelf blades or 1U servers are used in huge clusters (i.e. Google). But, no one that I know of in the corporate enterprise space has need for RJ.5 connectors.
We are using TwinAX, which has SFP connectors, to uplink servers. Fiber is used between switches. A combination of SFP switches and VM clusters has shrunk the datacenter footprint more dramatically than anything else. Cloud services are also reaching a maturing point.
The article was written by a noob. The i7 5775c is a 3.3GHz CPU, not 3.7GHz. 3.7GHz is only the *turbo boost* clockspeed.
If they can't even get simple facts correct, then it doesn't lend much credibility to the rest of the article.
My desktop has 6 fans in it, including the CPU fan and it is whisper quiet until I start playing Fallout, then my 970 kicks in and it sounds like a plane about to take off...
I used anti-vibration rubber screws and specifically choose fans that are designed to be quiet and went SSD for the OS drive. No need to go fanless these days...
PUC doesn't have authority to tell a municipality who can or cannot connect to a pole. Everyone isentitled to use the poles. Poles are, contrary to AT&T's old conception, not owned by AT they are owned by the town, and a town can and does wield eminent domain to possess property for a public good.
I can't speak for this case in particular but in many cases the poles ARE owned by AT&T or some other private entity. They might be owned by a third party like the power company. In fact it's kind of uncommon for the poles to actually be owned by the local municipality. There are laws governing use and access to the poles but they may very well be privately owned. For example the poles outside my house are owned by the local power company. The phone and cable companies pay the power company to utilize them. If the pole gets damaged it is the power company's responsibility to fix the pole. The local government does not and never has owned the poles near me.
My reading of the article on the law suit is that it isn't about who owns the poles. The problem is that the new ordinance has language that allows Google to require AT&T to re-position AT&T equipment on the pole at AT&T's expense. I'm willing to bet that the agreements that Google made with AT&T in other areas required Google to pay at least some of the expense. Which, personally, I think is fair.
avoid .... owe ... legal fraud
If you can avoid it, you do not owe it. It is legal. It is not fraud, however unjust you may think it is.
If you owe it, try to hide it, and do not pay it, it's called "Tax Evasion". That's against the law, you don't pay back taxes you pay back taxes and go to jail.
If there is a dispute between what you think you owe, and what the government thinks you owe, it's called a lawsuit. If France wins, google owes back taxes (presumably with interest). If Google wins they still pay nothing.
France is asserting that Google does in fact owe money that Google does not believe it owes. It's a lawsuit. This distinction is incredibly important in many countries, as what these companies are doing is usually LEGAL. It is our own governments that are screwing up in tax law, and our governments that need to fix the problem. Of course the second you talk about "fixing" tax law, you end up with all sorts of barnyard noises in congress (in the US, but I imagine we don't have the market cornered on this). It's easier in this case to wage a war of public opinion (similar to FBI and keys to the city) than to actually try to get these sorts of laws changed against a hostile congress. But, as a people, we need to understand this: the government is complicit. The only reason these lawsuits even happen is that there is debate, there shouldn't be debate.
Also when you go do lawsuit stuff, you always exaggerate your claims. It's part of the game.
I think the problem here is NOT that it is illegal or legal. They are using tricks to evade the laws or go in areas where the laws haven't explicitly forbidden. Companies are actively seeking loopholes in the wording or in international tax treaties, they are then abusing these holes. It may be legal by the letter of the law (or at least not illegal), but it was certainly not the intention of the law to allow it. It is like someone finding a way to steal or kill someone with some new technology and then finding the law doesn't cover it, it is obvious it is wrong and should be illegal but it hasn't been made explicitly illegal so they get away with it.
No, the problem is EXACTLY whether it is legal or illegal.
The definition of something being illegal is that there is a law that prohibits that behavior. If there isn't a law against it then it is legal. Argue all you want whether loopholes are just or unjust and whether the use of a loophole for non-intended use is moral or immoral but the point is that poorly crafted tax laws results in the legal reduction in tax burden for companies and rich people who can hire smart tax accountants.
As for your comparison, it's completely stupid. We have laws against murder and theft, full stop. Doesn't matter how you do it or if you use a proxy. The laws even cover being a party or conspiracy to murder. The only loophole, if you want to call it that, for murder is self-defense.
There is no law that says that you have to pay a specific amount of taxes. For example, if there was a law that all companies must pay a minimum of 10% in taxes with no qualifications and Google used loopholes as justification to pay less then your argument would make sense. There is no such law as far as I know.
I agree with you that in a just world corporations would shoulder more of the tax and infrastructure burden than they do. But it's up to us to vote in and lobby people who can change the laws.
Just how much of a risk is there to this exploit?
"A Logitech spokesman told the MIT Technology review that the company has a software update to fix the issue, but that the vulnerability Bastille detected “would be complex to replicate” since it requires being physically close to the victim, which makes it “a difficult and unlikely path of attack.”
It seems to me that you would have to be fairly close to the system that you are attacking as the USB plug doesn't have a lot of power or range. Yes, an attacker could install a repeater. But that too requires physical access. Plus, you have to know what type of system you are attacking (UNIX vs Windows), etc. It does seem like Logitech makes a good point even though they may have a vested interest in downplaying it.
> If nuclear was far superior, we'd be installing more of it.
Right. The world is completely rational and efficient.
I agree that Nuclear is superior for the simple reason that it is efficient and provides consistent power. Yes, bad things can happen. But modern designs are much safer.
As for popularity, well... Justin Beiber, Paris Hilton, Kardashians... I think that I made my point.. Just because something is popular doesn't mean that it's a good decision or superior.
I just want to point out that it's not an either/or situation. Personally, I love solar and wish we had much more of it in the US. Panels are finally getting to the point where they are efficient enough to make economic sense in the North East US and Canada. I'm less bullish on wind power. My concern has to do with the number of bird kills. Birds eat insects, including mosquitoes, and I hate mosquitoes. The most promising, in my opinion, is tidal power. But, then, we might end up disturbing fishing grounds. Everything has a trade-off...
wind, like solar and tidal, just needs good efficient energy storage
Fixed that for you... Battery storage will never reach the point where it is better for the environment than alternative solutions. High power capacitors are closer to being realistic. Alternatively, one of the traditional ways of storing solar and wind power is to pump water from a lower point to a higher point and then release it to generate power when needed.
http://www.climatetechwiki.org...
That being said, it's going to be several generations before we have the technology to store enough power where we can begin to shut down power plants.
We can choose living it up in a nuclear powered world, or suffer. If you think we have any other choice I say... bite me.
I agree with you. The biggest problem with nuclear power is that we aren't building new plants fast enough. The vast majority of nuclear power plants are old, really old, and past their original lifetimes.
The one technology that I think can compete with nuclear going forward is tidal energy.
A bigger question is - why didn't they count frames?
We know there are two HD resolutions for OTA - 1080i60 (60 fields per second, or approximately 30 frames/sec), and 720p60 (60 frames per second). These two resolutions and framerates have the nice property that they have the same pixel clock and data rate, so you can choose between resolution and framerate - for traditional TV programming you often just want resolution, so you use 1080i, but for fast action, you want framerate, so you use 720p.
Now, it's easy to see what framerate the camera runs at - take a spot in the game, and count frames while an onscreen timer (like say, the game clock!) ticks away. Then you move to the part of the video in question, then count frames. Since it's less than a second, it would be less than 60 frames in total, so it should be possible to manually hand count how many frames elapsed between the disputed times and then you can compute how much time has elapsed.
This way can also be used to verify that the camera timer is ticking away at the proper rate.
What I don't understand is how a digital timer would be affected by frame rates at all. It sounds to me like whoever came up with this particular timer solution was being a little too cute by coming up with some sort of algorithm rather than directly polling the clock.
Personally, I would have programmed it so that the recording system synched it's internal clock using GPS to atomic time servers and embedded the internal clock information directly into the video. If you do this, it doesn't matter how many fps are used.
Locking Torque converters have been the rule for a LONG time, like since the 70's... With all due respect for the guys from Car Talk, this *helps* with the efficiency, but there still is some energy losses due to the necessity of running the automatic part of the transmission. You have to keep the shift clutches engaged, that takes hydraulic pressure which implies a pump is running someplace. You also must circulate the transmission fluid to keep the various things lubricated and cool, which takes some power too. Power consumption in the transmission means less power for driving getting to the wheels.
I'm not saying the differential between the automatic and the manual is all that much these days, it's not, but if you are on the highway the manual is going to be better. Now if you want to argue that it's unlikely that your average skilled driver would be able to achieve better gas mileage in a mixed environment of city and highway driving on their manual, that for 99.9% of drivers would do better on an automatic, I can only agree with you. However, just straight out driving down the road at highway speed, not shifting, that manual is going to be hard to beat, all things being equal.
As you said, the difference is minor, approximately 1 MPG if we believe the numbers from the manufacturers. Personally, I consider that a very minor advantage, if not a draw when it comes to comparing the two. However, if you listen to most manual transmission fans, you would think that the difference was 10MPG. Those days are long gone...
"These days, manuals get crappy fuel economy; autos beat them every time"
Find me a non-hybrid that beats my 1987 manual transmission Tercel's 40+ MPG.
I have yet to see one at any dealership.
I severely doubt that you got 40+ MPG in an 87 Tercel. The Manual version was rated at 37 highway. Down hill on windy day, maybe... (grin)
But, for arguments sake, take a look at the Hyundai Accent. It gets 38 MPG for the manual and 37 for the automatic for highway driving.
There, found you a non-hybrid automatic that matches your Tercel... it even comes with Bluetooth, welcome to the 21st century... (grin)
One of the first things President Obama did after arriving in the White House was to steal Chrysler (the company that made Jeeps) from its shareholders, many of whom were middle class retirees, and essentially GIVE the company to Fiat. The price Fiat paid was essentially a token, and the President's team insisted the buyer be a foreign company. They company's "Jeep" brand had already been degraded during the Chrysler/Daimler years when a Euro-designed vehicle was re-branded as a "Jeep" (the The Jeep Liberty) and presented to the public as a newer better Cherokee (which it is NOT). The Liberty was bad enough, but the stuff rolling out now under the name "Jeep Cherokee" are just cars pretending to be SUVs and have little in common with what everybody used to think of as a "Jeep". As for a bad user-interface? It's a FIAT with the name "Jeep" stamped on it!
There wasn't anything special about those older Jeeps that you mention. Yeah, they looked more rugged, but that was about it. What has always differentiated Jeeps from other trucks is the 4WD system. All of the models that you mentioned have some form of the Jeep 4WD that are probably just as or more capable than the older systems. On top of that, Jeep continues to offer their higher end 4WD system on various trim levels (i.e. the Trailhawk). For example, I've seen many examples on youtube of people taking a 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited (my car) off-roading and it holding it's own.
My thought is that you've never tested the capabilities of the modern Jeep and that it's the looks that you don't like...
Correct for city driving. But this is a more recent development and it's not that much more. If you can keep the engine in the most economic sweet spot longer, you will get better gas mileage. It's hard to do that as effectively with a finite number of gears, even with flawless picking of the shift points by the driver..
However, if you are doing highway driving, the manual wins, every time.
Not true...
This used to be true because Automatics had torque converters with a slip system and Manuals didn't. Manuals lock into a gear and have no slip. Automatics have a slip mechanism that allows the car to stop at a light and not stall. This slip system also meant that there was some slip at higher speeds resulting in poorer fuel mileage in older Automatics.
However, modern Automatics have the ability to automatically "lock" the torque converter into a gear at higher speeds. This negates the advantage that manuals had at highway speeds.
http://www.cartalk.com/blogs/t...
In fact, a lot of the old arguments for selecting a Manual have dropped by the wayside as Automatic transmission technology has improved. There are really only two remaining arguments for get a manual, the first is that cars with manual transmissions cost a bit less and the second is that, for many, they are fun to drive... That last one will never go away...
I hear ya... Who wants to steal a crappy car with a manual transmission anyway?
I buy the manual because it's cheaper and lasts longer and I'm only interested in getting to point a to point b for as long as possible as cheaply as possible. Nobody want's my car because it's a bare bones pile of loosely related scrap metal and used car parts for most of the time I drive it.
Actually... it isn't the transmission that deters thieves. It's the car. But keep telling yourself that.
Manual transmission BOXES last much longer than automatics. The clutches, however, vary with the driver. If the driver is good, then the manual is just as good as the automatic. If not, then the automatic's clutches will last longer.
http://mechanics.stackexchange...
I see that you didn't haul out the old "manual is better on gas" myth. It used to be true, but the newer CVT and 8/9 speed engines are better.
Personally, I can drive a stick shift. My first car had a manual transmission. The most annoying part for me was holding it on hills. I had no problems doing it, it was just annoying. One of the cool things is that you can start it with a dead battery by just pushing it or rolling down hill (It was small enough that I could push it myself). It was great in College when I didn't have money for a new battery.
My Kia won't let me take the key out of the ignition unless the shifter is in park. You're saying my econobox has more safety features than a luxury Jeep?
I believe that all of the Jeeps now have keyless ignition... No key to remove...
Plus, the article clearly says that many of these cases are when people are leaving the car running. In these situations, they wouldn't be taking out the key, even in the Kia. For example, when getting out of the car to throw something in the back, to pick someone up, etc.
Should we hold back progress in to protect people from injury, should we penalize the RTFM challenged individuals, or something else?
There are two issues here. The first is new technology and the second is user training.
I have a 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee. The shifter acts just like a joystick, changing gears with a bump instead of going into a mechanical position. This forces the user to have to look at the dash, which shows the shift position, or at the top of the shift stick, shift position is lit. This would be a transition for people who have never used joysticks and who are used to muscle memory to determine what gear the shifter is in.
The second piece is user training. The manual clear says that the driver should apply the parking brake every time they park the car. This not only ensures the driver's safety in case they have the shifter in the wrong position but it also takes some of the stress off of the drive system. Of course, a lot of drivers are lazy and never use the parking brake. And Yes, on the Jeep it's called a "Parking Brake" for a reason. It isn't an "emergency brake", though it doubles as one.
In fact, this is what the manual says:
PARK (P) This range supplements the parking brake by locking the transmission. The engine can be started in this range. Never attempt to use PARK while the vehicle is in motion. Apply the parking brake when leaving the vehicle in this range. When parking on a level surface, you may shift the transmission into PARK first, and then apply the parking Shift Lever brake.
It's easy to argue that using a joystick is design flaw or a step backwards. I agree that humans are built with muscle memory and that a mechanical shift position is better than an electronic one. The ideal would be an electronic shifter with mechanical gates. But that doesn't negate the requirement to apply the parking bake in this type of vehicle.
It could be argued that using the parking brake as intended is muscle memory. In fact, I'm at the point where I automatically apply it when parking and disengage it when starting the car. The problem is that most drivers have no idea what the parking brake is for, beyond an emergency.
A rambling way to say that the design is partially to blame, an electronic shifter with gates would be better, and the driver is partially to blame, not using the parking brake. I would say a 50/50 or 60/40 split.
Oh, and one last thing, putting a car in Park does not guarantee that it will not roll. There have been cases where the parking prawl gives way (in general, not specific to any brand). It's always safer to use the parking brake.
The problem is, 200 Volts on a 110V circuit is a surge and will fry a 110V power supply. So surge protectors need to be voltage specific or they become ineffective at lower voltages.
I would go another route: Make sure that your have spare/alternative ways to power or charge your equipment. For example carry a 12V charger for your laptop (also works on some airplanes). Only buy equipment (phones/tablets) you can charge from an USB outlet. Carry a spare USB charger.
This will get easier over time with the USB type C connector and USB power delivery, as modern devices get equipped with it.
This...
Buy one or several power banks for your phone/tablet. Charge the power bank, not the device, and use the power bank to charge your portable devices.
I use a Kensington K33117 International All-in-One Travel Plug Adapter plus a Monster MP OTG400 BK Outlets To Go Power Strip when traveling. The Kensington travel adapter has a built-in ceramic slow transition fuse rated at 250v 2.5A plus a spare in the removable end. While it will take a grounded plug (i.e. the power strip, it's a tight fit but it does fit) it's not connected to anything, It's not a problem because none of my travel device plugs have grounded plugs, they are all two-prong.
I've never had the fuse blow nor experienced any problem with my devices during travel, so take the above with a grain of salt. Basically, I can't say how good the fuse is because I've never needed it.
This got me curious about how much power I am using for my devices as they have been upgraded since I got the travel plug adapter. Looking at my devices, the Surface Pro 4 tablet takes 1A input (~1.35A for a laptop), dual port 5V 2.1A USB adapter takes 0.5A input, and universal camera battery charger takes 0.2A input. So, a total of 1.7A when I travel for vacation and 2.05A when I travel for business @ 110v. If you are on 220V, the auto-switching power supply will use approximately half of the rated Amps. So, for me, a rating of 2.5A is fine.